Where the bill of complaint and the memorandum of the sale describes the property by street number, it is permissible to insert the correct legal description in the final decree.23 Where the wife brought the action, but the decree is taken in favor of both husband and wife, it was amendable in the Supreme court to conform to the facts.24 Where the delay beyond a stipulated time was due to the defendant's inability to furnish an abstract, such delay affords no grounds for refusal on his part to complete the sale.25 Want of understanding of the terms of a contract is not a defense to specific performance so long as the plaintiff was not the cause of such misunderstanding and same was not communicated to him,26 nor is conversation between defendant's agent or his attorney admissible on the question of her understanding, in the absence of plaintiff,27 a motion to dismiss is the proper practice to challenge the suffi-

20. Chap. Forfeiture of Land Contracts.

21. Pomeroy Eq. Jur., 2nd Ed. 2278-2279; Pearce v. Bastable, L. R. Ch. 122-125.

22. Pomeroy Eq. Jur., 2nd Ed., Supra.

23. Bailer v. Spivack, 213 Mich. 436.

24. Bailer v. Spivack, 213 Mich. 436.

t

25. Standard Oil v. Murray, 214 Mich. 297.

26. Standard Oil v. Murray, 214 Mich. 299.

27. Standard Oil v. Murray, 214 Mich. 299.

ciency of a bill of complaint for specific performance on the ground that the plaintiff has an adequate remedy at law.28

Where the contract is conceded to have been made of two separate memoranda, it was not error to exclude one from the evidence unless both were offered.29

Any attempt to modify a written agreement, if such modification is made on Sunday will be disregarded and held to be void.30 If language is found in a purported copy of an option not contained in the original as recorded and relied upon, such language will be disregarded.31

If the premises have been sold to a bona fide purchaser pending the action by vendor, the court may award a decree for damages against the defendant.32